Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

abduction caught on Google satellite

For anyone who might want to have a side conversation...you're welcome here!
abduction caught on Google satellite
Post by Lord Skimper   » Tue Jan 24, 2017 8:06 pm

Lord Skimper
Vice Admiral

Posts: 1685
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 11:49 pm
Location: Calgary, Nova, Gryphon.

________________________________________
Just don't ask what is in the protein bars.
Top
Re: abduction caught on Google satellite
Post by WeirdlyWired   » Wed Jan 25, 2017 5:42 am

WeirdlyWired
Captain of the List

Posts: 487
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2016 12:08 pm
Location: 35 NW center of nowhere.

Lord Skimper wrote:http://www.torquayheraldexpress.co.uk/amazing-evidence-of-my-alien-abduction-claims-ufo-spotter-john-mooner/story-30078820-detail/story.html


OK, I give in what IS in the Fruity Oaty bars? And how many did you eat before posting this? At least it is a better photoshop than the Enquirer usually does.
Helas,chou, Je m'en fache.
Top
Re: abduction caught on Google satellite
Post by The E   » Wed Jan 25, 2017 9:03 am

The E
Vice Admiral

Posts: 1607
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 12:28 pm
Location: Paderborn, Germany

WeirdlyWired wrote:OK, I give in what IS in the Fruity Oaty bars? And how many did you eat before posting this? At least it is a better photoshop than the Enquirer usually does.


Not even sure it's a photoshop. Thing is, all these things show are high-luminosity light sources during daylight.

Now, just theorycrafting here, but what sort of thing could produce something like that in a residential area during daytime? One thing that could do it, for example, would be glasshouses; and as things would have it, well, look at this picture:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C3A8-tDXcAA5Vx7.jpg

But no, this surely must be UFOs. And the other blur of pixels is definitely a guy punching an alien. Sure. Right.
Top
Re: abduction caught on Google satellite
Post by WeirdlyWired   » Fri Jan 27, 2017 4:01 am

WeirdlyWired
Captain of the List

Posts: 487
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2016 12:08 pm
Location: 35 NW center of nowhere.

The E wrote:
WeirdlyWired wrote:OK, I give in what IS in the Fruity Oaty bars? And how many did you eat before posting this? At least it is a better photoshop than the Enquirer usually does.


Not even sure it's a photoshop. Thing is, all these things show are high-luminosity light sources during daylight.

Now, just theorycrafting here, but what sort of thing could produce something like that in a residential area during daytime? One thing that could do it, for example, would be glasshouses; and as things would have it, well, look at this picture:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C3A8-tDXcAA5Vx7.jpg

But no, this surely must be UFOs. And the other blur of pixels is definitely a guy punching an alien. Sure. Right.


So a good flare from a swimming pool or greenhouse, draw around where-ever and clor the whole area with the light flash.

She's been talking to the Fruity Oaty Bars again, Mal.
Top
Re: abduction caught on Google satellite
Post by cthia   » Sat Jan 28, 2017 6:13 am

cthia
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 8426
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2014 12:10 pm

The E wrote:
WeirdlyWired wrote:OK, I give in what IS in the Fruity Oaty bars? And how many did you eat before posting this? At least it is a better photoshop than the Enquirer usually does.


Not even sure it's a photoshop. Thing is, all these things show are high-luminosity light sources during daylight.

Now, just theorycrafting here, but what sort of thing could produce something like that in a residential area during daytime? One thing that could do it, for example, would be glasshouses; and as things would have it, well, look at this picture:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C3A8-tDXcAA5Vx7.jpg

But no, this surely must be UFOs. And the other blur of pixels is definitely a guy punching an alien. Sure. Right.
WeirdlyWired wrote:So a good flare from a swimming pool or greenhouse, draw around where-ever and clor the whole area with the light flash.

She's been talking to the Fruity Oaty Bars again, Mal.

Both of you are missing the point...

IF True that subject had been screaming abduction before image was discovered THEN image could very well be considered too coincidental along with any debunking theory advocating natural causes being highly suspect therefore, possibly indicating enough supporting evidence to merit further investigation.

Son, your mother says I have to hang you. Personally I don't think this is a capital offense. But if I don't hang you, she's gonna hang me and frankly, I'm not the one in trouble. —cthia's father. Incident in ? Axiom of Common Sense
Top
Re: abduction caught on Google satellite
Post by The E   » Sat Jan 28, 2017 7:11 am

The E
Vice Admiral

Posts: 1607
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 12:28 pm
Location: Paderborn, Germany

cthia wrote:Both of you are missing the point...

IF True that subject had been screaming abduction before image was discovered THEN image could very well be considered too coincidental along with any debunking theory advocating natural causes being highly suspect therefore, possibly indicating enough supporting evidence to merit further investigation.


No. Repeat after me: "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". Has it sunk in yet?

Before we can seriously consider a theory that requires as many moving parts as the UFO/Alien abduction theory does, we must consider more mundane explanations for what those photos show. As it turns out, there are readily available explanations for the observed phenomena here that do not require Aliens, just a particular piece of structure and a bit of coincidence regarding the position of the sun and the camera. That means that the evidence provided is nowhere near as conclusive as Skimper or the author of that piece seem to believe.
Regarding the claims of abductions: All that is definitely claimed is that the person in question suffered memory loss on several occasions, and that he believes that the photo there was taken during one such episode.
But how did he reach that conclusion? Google Earth does not date its photographical material apart from showing a 2017 copyright. Therefore, we cannot confirm the assertion made, let alone confirm that the person who wrote this was actually suffering from memory loss.
Even if he did, Occam's Razor once more applies: We know that there are multiple reasons why someone might lose a memory that do not involve aliens.

So, what is the proper course of action here? To believe that this is true, or to believe that it isn't? I believe the latter is way more likely than the former, and as such, do not believe that this supposed evidence of an abduction in progress adds anything of consequence to the corpus of evidence for alien life on Earth.
Top
Re: abduction caught on Google satellite
Post by cthia   » Sat Jan 28, 2017 9:56 am

cthia
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 8426
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2014 12:10 pm

cthia wrote:Both of you are missing the point...

IF True that subject had been screaming abduction before image was discovered THEN image could very well be considered too coincidental along with any debunking theory advocating natural causes being highly suspect therefore, possibly indicating enough supporting evidence to merit further investigation.
The E wrote:No. Repeat after me: "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". Has it sunk in yet?
No, it doesn't. No further evidence is required by the (in this case) victim, only the disbelievers. I have my own unexplained phenomena, and the intense fear alone was evidence enough for me then and still is now. It was a long time ago and still fresh in my mind. And believe it or not, Google Earth was instrumental in solving my puzzle as well. And the related image in my own case provided by Google is clear, crystal. And I don't give a jack's ass who believes or doesn't. In fact, I haven't even shared. And won't, because the wrong people MIGHT believe.

Before we can seriously consider a theory that requires as many moving parts as the UFO/Alien abduction theory does, we must consider more mundane explanations for what those photos show. As it turns out, there are readily available explanations for the observed phenomena here that do not require Aliens, just a particular piece of structure and a bit of coincidence regarding the position of the sun and the camera. That means that the evidence provided is nowhere near as conclusive as Skimper or the author of that piece seem to believe.
Regarding the claims of abductions: All that is definitely claimed is that the person in question suffered memory loss on several occasions, and that he believes that the photo there was taken during one such episode.
But how did he reach that conclusion? Google Earth does not date its photographical material apart from showing a 2017 copyright. Therefore, we cannot confirm the assertion made, let alone confirm that the person who wrote this was actually suffering from memory loss.
Even if he did, Occam's Razor once more applies: We know that there are multiple reasons why someone might lose a memory that do not involve aliens.

So, what is the proper course of action here? To believe that this is true, or to believe that it isn't? I believe the latter is way more likely than the former, and as such, do not believe that this supposed evidence of an abduction in progress adds anything of consequence to the corpus of evidence for alien life on Earth.

The only moving part required are functioning neurons in the brain that causes you to realize that the notion of humanity being the only intelligent life in the universe is statistically appalling. And that if there is life elsewhere then chances of it being more advanced than some of the silly ass humans I know would be highly likely.

OTOH, we have "science minded" individuals, not totally unlike yourself who "scientifically" find it impossible to believe in a higher power because "science says so." But these same "scientific minded" people really believe, statistically speaking, life on Earth in our remote spiral arm of a galaxy completely removed from the real party is something special. Your science is good enough to debunk the notion of a higher power, but the statistics of science fails you when applied to the possibility of there being extraterrestrial life and that it could be advanced enough and have visited here. Albeit, if your argument was that no alien life form was ever likely to want to visit such a bassackwards planet of ignorants other than their resources then I'd tend to agree.

But of course, there isn't a God either because it would require too many "moving parts."

Thing about Occam's Razor is that if it is applied to a notion that is predicated on a fallacious hypothesis, the law fails.

Everyone shouldn't try to use a razor.

Why should I repeat after you, so the blind can lead the blind?

Son, your mother says I have to hang you. Personally I don't think this is a capital offense. But if I don't hang you, she's gonna hang me and frankly, I'm not the one in trouble. —cthia's father. Incident in ? Axiom of Common Sense
Top
Re: abduction caught on Google satellite
Post by The E   » Sat Jan 28, 2017 11:26 am

The E
Vice Admiral

Posts: 1607
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 12:28 pm
Location: Paderborn, Germany

cthia wrote:The only moving part required are functioning neurons in the brain that causes you to realize that the notion of humanity being the only intelligent life in the universe is statistically appalling. And that if there is life elsewhere then chances of it being more advanced than some of the silly ass humans I know would be highly likely.


Wrong. In order for an alien abduction to be even possible, several highly unlikely factors have to all be true, to wit: That intelligent life has developed near enough to us that they can reach us, that said life has developed the technology required, that they have decided to abduct random individuals, and that the person who made this report is one of them. Furthermore, said abduction has to happen in the precise moment where a surveillance satellite is abovehead.

Now, this is not impossible, of course, but is it likely? No.

OTOH, we have "science minded" individuals, not totally unlike yourself who "scientifically" find it impossible to believe in a higher power because "science says so." But these same "scientific minded" people really believe, statistically speaking, life on Earth in our remote spiral arm of a galaxy completely removed from the real party is something special.


We are something special. The odds against life developing are enormous, the odds against intelligent life developing even more so; that it has happened here makes Earth definitely a special place.

(Also, "completely removed from the real party" means that we're not as likely to get caught in some random supernova blast; it's actually a good thing)

Your science is good enough to debunk the notion of a higher power, but the statistics of science fails you when applied to the possibility of there being extraterrestrial life and that it could be advanced enough and have visited here.


Again, I haven't said that it's impossible, only that it is unlikely, and that there are indications that those blobs that are supposedly UFOs are actually just visual artefacts created by reflected light.
Which, again, are a much more likely explanation.

Albeit, if your argument was that no alien life form was ever likely to want to visit such a bassackwards planet of ignorants other than their resources then I'd tend to agree.


If there is alien life capable of interstellar travel anywhere near us, it would be kinda expected that something would show up here.

But that's not the question here, is it. The question is, do those photographs and eyewitness reports constitute conclusive proof that aliens are here, and the answer is simply "No", because there are too many alternative interpretations available.

But of course, there isn't a God either because it would require too many "moving parts."


There could very well be a god. There just isn't any proof of his existence.

Thing about Occam's Razor is that if it is applied to a notion that is predicated on a fallacious hypothesis, the law fails.


Then please point out where the hypothesis that intelligent life is rare and that interstellar travel is hard is fallacious. Show the proof.

Why should I repeat after you, so the blind can lead the blind?


Because I have the faint hope that some day you will realize why approaching things like this with a skeptic mindset is healthier than believing them unquestioningly.
Top
Re: abduction caught on Google satellite
Post by cthia   » Sat Jan 28, 2017 2:08 pm

cthia
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 8426
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2014 12:10 pm

cthia wrote:The only moving part required are functioning neurons in the brain that causes you to realize that the notion of humanity being the only intelligent life in the universe is statistically appalling. And that if there is life elsewhere then chances of it being more advanced than some of the silly ass humans I know would be highly likely.
The E wrote:Wrong. In order for an alien abduction to be even possible, several highly unlikely factors have to all be true, to wit: That intelligent life has developed near enough to us that they can reach us, that said life has developed the technology required, that they have decided to abduct random individuals, and that the person who made this report is one of them. Furthermore, said abduction has to happen in the precise moment where a surveillance satellite is abovehead.

Now, this is not impossible, of course, but is it likely? No.
You are displaying nonsensical logic ill conceived of arrogant human prejudices and presently available and bounded human knowledge. The only prerequisite for an alien abduction to occur is for aliens to actually exist.

"Near enough to us?" Hilarious. By whose tech and knowledge? Ours? Or that of an intellectually and technologically superior species? All of the other criteria that you state must be possible are only incidentals. Please note, "highly unlikely" is as likely as Trump becoming President of the US. Unlikely is such a dangerous word.

cthia wrote:OTOH, we have "scientifically minded" individuals, not totally unlike yourself who "scientifically" find it impossible to believe in a higher power because "science says so." But these same "scientifically minded" people really believe, statistically speaking, that life on Earth in our remote spiral arm of a galaxy completely removed from the real party is something special.
The E wrote:We are something special. The odds against life developing are enormous, the odds against intelligent life developing even more so; that it has happened here makes Earth definitely a special place.

(Also, "completely removed from the real party" means that we're not as likely to get caught in some random supernova blast; it's actually a good thing)
Again, you are displaying nonsensical logic conceived of arrogant human prejudices and available human knowledge.

The only thing that makes us special is that we are probably alone in our abject ignorance and bliss.

And the fact that some of us are saved by grace. I don't expect you to assimilate that one.


cthia wrote:Your science is good enough to debunk the notion of a higher power, but the statistics of science fails you when applied to the possibility of there being extraterrestrial life and that it could be advanced enough and have visited us here.
The E wrote:Again, I haven't said that it's impossible, only that it is unlikely, and that there are indications that those blobs that are supposedly UFOs are actually just visual artefacts created by reflected light.
Which, again, are a much more likely explanation.
Indeed? All UFO sightings have a plausible explanation such as a weather balloon. As in whether that bullshit of an explanation will ever balloon into something that all intelligent people will swallow.

cthia wrote:Albeit, if your argument was that no alien life form was ever likely to want to visit such a bassackwards planet of ignorants other than for their resources then I'd tend to agree.
The E wrote:If there is alien life capable of interstellar travel anywhere near us, it would be kinda expected that something would show up here.

But that's not the question here, is it. The question is, do those photographs and eyewitness reports constitute conclusive proof that aliens are here, and the answer is simply "No", because there are too many alternative interpretations available.

The only intact logic you've displayed thus far.

I never said that the photographs are conclusive or that I believe what the guy is selling. I'm simply saying that I do not disrespect him enough or the possibility, in light of an absolute absence of proof to the contrary, to taint the pool by my own preconceived notions and prejudices therefore blaming it all on unicorns.

cthia wrote:But of course, there isn't a God either because it would require too many "moving parts."
The E wrote:There could very well be a god. There just isn't any proof of his existence.
Dishearteningly wrong, again. However, I won't replay that old song with you. There isn't "tangible" proof in the form that scientists will accept. Science does not understand the spiritual realm. Try connecting with it for once in your life if you'd like to understand it. Scientific instrumentation does not work on it.


cthia wrote:Thing about Occam's Razor is that if it is applied to a notion that is predicated on a fallacious hypothesis, the law fails.

Again, everyone shouldn't try to use a razor. You can cut yourself with it or worse, someone else.
The E wrote:Then please point out where the hypothesis that intelligent life is rare and that interstellar travel is hard is fallacious. Show the proof.
It is fallacious because we (humanity) haven't even ventured beyond our own moon. And our remote vehicles have never ventured out of our own solar system. More arrogance. We are as arrogant as the many scientists in the scientific world who once thought the Earth was flat who also had never ventured beyond their own spiral arm of existence.

cthia wrote:Why should I repeat after you, so the blind can lead the blind?
The E wrote:Because I have the faint hope that some day you will realize why approaching things like this with a skeptic mindset is healthier than believing them unquestioningly.
Healthier? I won't even ask where you obtained that meterstick.

Not unquestioningly, but with an open mind not born of arrogance and faulty logic.

Son, your mother says I have to hang you. Personally I don't think this is a capital offense. But if I don't hang you, she's gonna hang me and frankly, I'm not the one in trouble. —cthia's father. Incident in ? Axiom of Common Sense
Top
Re: abduction caught on Google satellite
Post by WeirdlyWired   » Sun Jan 29, 2017 5:19 am

WeirdlyWired
Captain of the List

Posts: 487
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2016 12:08 pm
Location: 35 NW center of nowhere.

I still say lay off the Blue Sun brand Fruity Oaty Bars. First, wasn't it about twenty years ago (last time I was in Ashevile, NC) that the grays were banned from Earth space?

Maybe there is life on other planets. Maybe some planets even have intelligent life. Perhaps there is some intelligent oort cloud out there that actually intelligently designed the entire swarm of galaxies.

There is NO [credible] EVIDENCE of alien space ships plying the reaches of our atmosphere, no evidence besides assertion of alien abduction.

I have no idea what that picture is supposed to show, but to me it does not look like someone being kidnapped by space herpies. (yes that IS a line from some ancient Mel Brooks movie). Or even thwarting an attempted kidnapping.
Helas,chou, Je m'en fache.
Top

Return to Free-Range Topics...